[Web4lib] FW: Circulating Kindle and Nooks

Wed Apr 14 13:25:19 EDT 2010

The internet is a has spawned many disruptive technologies and,
dollar-wise, content sharing has been the most successful and most
devastating. Publishers have the benefit of having watched the record
industry go down faster than the Titanic and have learned from that
experience. They aren't about to let that happen to them without a
fight, and they quite accurately have framed it as a fight for their
lives. Fair use is a chink in their armor.

Libraries, as we have known them, are built on the fundamental
inseparability of content and media. That model is dead, so the
scramble to find our place in a new, as yet to be defined model is
inevitable.

The publishers are understandably protective about their model at this
critical juncture. While they might see the issues that libraries are
facing somewhere at the far reaches of their peripheral vision, they
certainly aren't focused on them. And while there might be some in
their community who view libraries as an annoyance that they wish
would go away, I believe that there are many, if not most, who
understand that this is an issue that they need to address, but are
deferring action pending developments in the the broader spectrum.

Libraries and the people who think about them need to recognize that
this is the card we have been dealt, and it is on us to play it. First
and foremost, we need to make our voices heard and do everything we
can to keep a loud and public conversation going. We need to educate
ourselves and our constituents and demand a seat at the table while
there is still a pot to be divided.

Bringing this back to the original discussion and Steven's point,
there are questions that need answers:

How does this model fit with the idea of having buildings called libraries?

How can we hold our place inline while we figure this out?

Loaning e-readers? Loaning licensed content? Distributing free content?

Thanks,

Cary

Please forgive the metaphor abuse.

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Steven E. Patamia, Ph.D.
<patamia at gmail.com> wrote:
> What wonderful thread this has become!
>
> I would like to emphasize a few ideas.
>
> In adapting the concept of libraries to modern times, it would be a mistake
> to overlook the power and utility of ambiance.  Call it the power of place.
>  People are still social animals and they still are, each according to their
> interests and personality traits, attracted to human interaction, tangible
> presence, the "feel" of places.  If this were not true, Starbucks would not
> be a successful venture.  Libraries and churches are examples of physical
> environments that program those within them to be receptive to intellectual
> and spiritual content delivered there.  Until the holodecks of Star Trek
> fame become a reality, delivering content within a physical place will
> continue to be desirable and effective.
>
> Having said that, content is an abstraction that in modern times often does
> not require a fixed place to exist, but still benefits from being presented
> or promoted in a place.  Libraries have hitherto been places in which
> content is promoted as sacred in some sense.
>
> Still, to be viable over time, a library as a physical place needs to be
> designed to attract -- not just in terms of the content which is accessible
> there, but in terms of the psychological benefits derived from being there.
>  Services, access to expertise, and access to non-digital content containers
> (i.e. "books") are still important, but it is the veneration of its content
> promoted by that place that will justify continuation as well defined
> entities.
>
> I happen to be interested in promoting virtual libraries as the future
> vanguard and custodian of research publications, but that is not the
> dominant role played by libraries in general.  Libraries in general are
> mechanisms for promoting the preservation and use of accumulated knowledge
> by members of society at large in order to insure that everyone has a
> substantial inalienable right to access the wisdom accumulated from the
> experience and imagination of all others over all time.
>
> So yes, Cary Gordon is correct, there is now a battle raging between those
> who think they own content and those who are the champions for the ultimate
> intended beneficiaries of content.  What's worse, it is not always the
> authors (though some of them are in league) but the distributors who are
> asserting their control and usurping all mechanisms that threaten their
> dominance.  The problem for them is that in terms of pure content, as
> created by the authors themselves, publishers and distributors are
> potentially irrelevant in the electronic age.  They fight back
> by seizing control over the intellectual property rights involved -- and
> many authors join in, albeit, in my opinion, with somewhat stronger moral
> credentials.
>
> If these purveyors of content look at a library as competition, they will by
> a thousand cuts destroy them.  If they think they can control them or
> benefit from their existence, they will tolerate them.  If public libraries
> in particular are accepted as necessary to democracy as is a free press (a
> corrupted concept these days) then perhaps they can become untouchable.  A
> public library is a public utility.  The public library as a place is a
> symbol recognizable to all that having access to ideas and objective
> knowledge is a right without which a "free" democratic society cannot
> endure.  Mass media has aptly demonstrated that it is vulnerable to bias and
> conflict of interest and will likely never obviate the public benefit
> libraries provide even though it competes with them for societal attention
> and wins overwhelmingly on market share alone.
>
> So, you guys in the library business are quite literally at a crossroads in
> history.  I am impressed to see your recognize and grapple with the
> implications of all that is going on.  It is a difficult problem, but a
> fascinating one.  I can only hope that my view of the nature of the problem
> will be of some use or inspiration.   I have no crystal ball and no
> privileged view to promote.  My bias is simply that I think the loss of free
> public access to basic information, and even the ideas championed by works
> of fiction, are what allows societies overall to continue to mature -- and I
> value that.
>
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Mitchell, Michael <
> Michael.Mitchell at brazosport.edu> wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org [mailto:
>> web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Michael Schofield
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 10:13 AM
>>
>> <snip> At some
>> point (way down the road), it is reasonable to expect that everyone will
>> have a tethered device with [hopefully] free [but probably just cheap]
>> internet. Then the question is what use is a physical library when everyone
>> has their own hardware and free access points abound nationwide.
>> ...........................
>>
>> I am beginning more and more to like the idea of library as place.
>> Community, social, intellectual center where people come to learn, mingle,
>> share the environment, information, and knowledge. The Intellectual Commons
>> so to speak. I don't think our physical tools, equipment, or resources will
>> be able to be exceptional in the new world but we can still offer a unique
>> and rarified environment. And, we'll still be the experts in the quest for
>> knowledge and available to share that expertise.
>>
>>
>> Michael Mitchell
>> Technical Services Librarian
>> Brazosport College
>> Lake Jackson, TX
>> michael.mitchell at brazosport.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steven E. Patamia, Ph.D., J.D.
> Personal Cell: (352) 219-6592
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>

-- 
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com